Poll: When Did You/Are You Planning to Start Soc Sec?

[RobLJ]

I myself am proud that I blundered into making the right choices, chief of which I inherited the right genes, unlike my twin who made the bad choice of inheriting the very rare progressive myclonic disease that disabled him, then killed him at 40. (Obviously we were fraternal twins.)


I went through university and grad school believing that meant I should not fail or I was betraying my good fortune. I never believed that I was not lucky; I just had to look at my twin.

All y'alls mileage will vary; I just know I was lucky as hell and it still haunts me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrLoco Disagree. Since fortunate implies luck. I believe I was smart enough not to make poor life choices early in life. Nothing to do with fortune.

[inmypryme]

If you are a savy disciplined intelligent investor/money manager/professional,you know that you can obtain a far greater return by taking present day/value dollars,and investing them in a high yielding vehicle.A simple vanguard mutual fund/etf,(the best in class and no/low fees/expenses),historically yields at a minimum in the 10% range excluding dividends and reinvestments.That alone,militates against "waiting" for several years for the government to "give" you an extra 4% to 8% on your initial "early" social security payout.Also,if you are in a higher income/net worth level,the taxes on any benefit will no doubt increase substantially in the future and/or result in decrease benefits and means testing.I am a well to do quite accomplished attorney,ceo and member of the accredited investor class,and there is absolutely no logical and/or rational rationale to wait one extra day to collect social security benefits for the reasons aforementioned,leave alone the program solvency and life expectancy risks to boot.Godspeed and Namaste,Stuart Rothenberg Esq.

[Don46]

I took mine at 66 on the advice of my accountant and based on the short lifespan of males in my family. I will break even at about 85, I remember my accountant telling me. I’m 75 now. I’m not so sure we took taxes into account there., but no regrets. It all depends on when you plan to die, doesn’t t it?

My wife is waiting until 70, which is this summer so she will have a nice monthly check in addition to her pension and her RMD.

[Poweruser]

Currently 60, planning on 70. DW is 8.5 years younger and has a much lower PIA so the goal is maximize the survivor benefit. This also allows for Roth conversions.

[joedil]

I'm holding out to age 70 (am now 68) when my benefit will increase from around $2300 at age 66 to a little over $3000 at age 70. Been collecting a spousal benefit of $1056 since 66....it's working out fine....

[GaryInCO]

64 now, planning to take it at FRA. Originally I intended to wait until 70, but then in the last year I got two different cancer diagnoses. One of which has a very uncertain life expectancy -- was 2-4 years until fairly recently, but treatments are much improved now, and my oncologist insists I'll die of old age. But ...

By my rough calculation you have to live to about 85 to break even on waiting. I figure the odds of me lasting that long are slim. My mom just died at 91, but my dad died (of the exact same nasty stuff I have) at 73. OpenSS says my benefits max out if I wait until 69, but they're not taking the cancer into account. And even without that in the calculation, OpenSS says starting at FRA only costs me 2.7% off the max at age 69. So I'll grab the SS while I can and enjoy the extra $$ while I'm young(er).

In fact, if I take it NOW, OpenSS sez it only costs me an extra 2% vs. waiting another 22 months. But starting now would cost me 12% off my FRA amount. Hmmmm.

[ychuck46]

Wife started at 62, while I waited to start one year later at 63. I decided it wasn't worth it to wait any longer since I could make more $ investing than I could by waiting until FRA or later.

[LakeRat1]

DW retired at 59.5, started drawing SS at 62, I retired at 52, I plan to start drawing at 62....... Tomorrow is not promised ......

[GaryInCO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by inmypryme If you are a savy disciplined intelligent investor/money manager/professional,you know that you can obtain a far greater return by taking present day/value dollars,and investing them in a high yielding vehicle.A simple vanguard mutual fund/etf,(the best in class and no/low fees/expenses),historically yields at a minimum in the 10% range excluding dividends and reinvestments.

Including dividends, Vanguard VTI has gone up about 8.7%/yr in the last 20 years. (Adjusted price of 38.59 in 2001, 204 now. (204/38.59)^(1/20) = 1.087.) And that included a gigantic 5x bull run, which is already very long in the tooth -- it started 12 years ago, vs. the average bull length which is 2.7 years. I would not count on it staying in a rampant bull for the next 20-30 years, so I would not bet the farm (or the retirement) on getting a 10% return.

[Kathe555]

Definitely age 70. The 8% return is too much for me to give up, and my mother's family lives a long time. Dad's side, not so much, but they were all smokers.

[bluelight]

My DH will be 75 next month and took SS when he turned 65. My FRA is 66 and 4 months, I have just over 2 years to go.

We've been living off of DH's SS, pensions and dividends from our investments since I retired in 2019. With the exception of vacations, we haven't had to hit savings yet, so while we can afford to hold off on my SS until FRA, but I'm not sure I want to. I'll revisit when I turn 65 at the end of this year.

[kbst]

62. Got plenty of money to live on and don’t want to leave any money on the table in case I die early.

[carty1]

I took my SS at 63years 3months. My wife (still working) works for a railroad and will be entitled to RR Retirement. She will probably retire next year.

[mickeyd]

Started SS on my account 4 years after poaching as a spouse on DWs account (think that has since been changed) @ age 70. I was happy to get 8% increase for 4 years and I did not need the SSA income stream to live on. Life is good.

[harllee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by joedil I'm holding out to age 70 (am now 68) when my benefit will increase from around $2300 at age 66 to a little over $3000 at age 70. Been collecting a spousal benefit of $1056 since 66....it's working out fine....

These are almost my exact numbers. Collecting spousal now, will switch to my own SS in about 6 months at age 70. Haw worked fine for me too. But the younger folks can no longer do this.

[imnontrad]

I am an admin of the "Social Security Intelligence" FB group and we answer questions like this all the time.

There are many factors -

If married with a spouse who has a lower benefit and no children who would receive a benefit - The person with the lower SS benefit should file first and the other spouse hold out until age 70. this will ensure that when one spouse dies, the surviving spouse will have the highest SS amount possible.

if single, it would depend on how much you have in assets. Once again, if you wait until 70, you will have a much higher benefit - and that extra money may come in handy later to be able to hire in-home help.

Also, you need to look at how much you have in pre-tax retirement accounts. By delaying SS, you have more years to convert money to Roth without affecting your income tax bracket or Medicare premium rate. In addition, if married, it may be better to draw this down so if one spouse dies, the surviving spouse will not be saddled with higher income taxes plus Medicare premiums especially after starting to take RMDs.

Many look for a "break even point and compare that date to their expected longevity. The longevity tables were revised upward late last year. But the tables are based on the mortality of everyone who were born in a certain year - including those who died as children. So, if you have made it to 60 and are in decent health, chances are that you will live many years beyond the "drop dead" date in the table. So the longer you can wait, up until age 70, the more likelihood is that you will get more money over your lifespan (and chances are, at least 1 spouse will live past 90).

[2retireearly]

One needs to think of the tax implications. If the lower dollar amount at a younger age, is all you need, then great. But if you need to supplement it with more income from a taxable (tax deferred IRA), you might be more taxes on that Soc Sec amount, than you really want to. think of taxes when you make your decision. I'll take mine at 67...close to my full soc sec age. and will need a small amount from IRA to supplement it.

[harllee]

You also need to consider the Affordable Care Act up until age 65. If you are getting your insurance from the ACA from ages 62-65 you might not want to take SS until after 65 in order to not mess up your ACA subsidy.

[Dtail]

Quote:

Originally Posted by harllee You also need to consider the Affordable Care Act up until age 65. If you are getting your insurance from the ACA from ages 62-65 you might not want to take SS until after 65 in order to not mess up your ACA subsidy.

And that's my situation, plus a lump sum pension at 65, so the earliest choice is at 66.

[ddoorn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brdofpray I took my SS as early as possible. My wife, a retired teacher, never participated in SS. She is not eligible to receive benefits. And, if I pass before her, she is not eligible for survivor benefits, on my record, due to her pension, and IRS WEP exclusion. We decided to take my benefit, and funnel it into our portfolio. In this way she will get a greater benefit if I check out first. So far, this plan is working out very well.

I wondered about the effects on spousal benefits, as I am 10 years older than my wife: is there an impact on her SS payout if I delay? She will likely draw a higher benefit than I due to her much higher income.

I plan to wait until Full Retirement Age, 66 and 2/3, and perhaps beyond if I don’t feel the need by then perhaps wait longer.

Don